Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-07-11 Thread Herbert Xu
Hi Marco: On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 09:23:00AM +, Marco Berizzi wrote: What should I do? Mangling MSS with iptables --set-mss ? Altering MSS to 1440 did the trick. See: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdevm=114373067423528w=2 Yes that's enough, although proper PMTU would be

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-07-11 Thread Herbert Xu
On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 08:28:32AM +, Marco Berizzi wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# ping 10.49.59.23 PING 10.49.59.23 (10.49.59.23) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 10.49.59.23: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=91.9 ms 64 bytes from 10.49.59.23: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=49.3 ms 64 bytes from

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-07-11 Thread Marco Berizzi
Herbert Xu wrote: Hi Marco: Hi Herbert, I'm very happy hearing you. On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 09:23:00AM +, Marco Berizzi wrote: What should I do? Mangling MSS with iptables --set-mss ? Altering MSS to 1440 did the trick. See:

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-07-11 Thread Marco Berizzi
Herbert Xu wrote: On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 08:28:32AM +, Marco Berizzi wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# ping 10.49.59.23 PING 10.49.59.23 (10.49.59.23) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 10.49.59.23: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=91.9 ms 64 bytes from 10.49.59.23: icmp_seq=2 ttl=247 time=49.3 ms

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-07-11 Thread Marco Berizzi
Herbert Xu wrote: We can say these things for certain: 1) The path between mimosa and pleiadi has a packet loss problem. A small burst of 10 or so fragments is enough to cause at least half of them to be lost. This problem may be specific to IPsec traffic (ISPs often discriminate

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-07-11 Thread Marco Berizzi
Marco Berizzi wrote: Herbert Xu wrote: On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 08:28:32AM +, Marco Berizzi wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# ping 10.49.59.23 PING 10.49.59.23 (10.49.59.23) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 10.49.59.23: icmp_seq=1 ttl=247 time=91.9 ms 64 bytes from 10.49.59.23:

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-07-11 Thread Marco Berizzi
Another tricky behaviour: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp# telnet 10.49.59.23 3218 Trying 10.49.59.23... Connected to 10.49.59.23. Escape character is '^]'. Connection closed by foreign host. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp# tcpdump -p -n -v ip host 10.49.59.23 HERBERT-20060711 [1] 4797 [EMAIL

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-07-11 Thread Marco Berizzi
Running this on mimosa 'mitigates' the problem: ip addr add 172.29.128.1/28 dev eth2 Connections are pretty slow but they aren't reseted anymore. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-07-11 Thread Herbert Xu
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 11:22:18AM +0200, Marco Berizzi wrote: I'm able to connect to a sap server connected to the milano network from a sapgui client connected to the venezia network. No problem. If packet loss is a problem it should be also a problem with this tunnel. Am I wrong? It

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-07-11 Thread Herbert Xu
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 11:31:33AM +0200, Marco Berizzi wrote: Me again. After a while here is: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp# ping 10.49.59.23 PING 10.49.59.23 (10.49.59.23) 56(84) bytes of data. --- 10.49.59.23 ping statistics --- 4 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-07-11 Thread Herbert Xu
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 12:32:45PM +0200, Marco Berizzi wrote: Running this on mimosa 'mitigates' the problem: ip addr add 172.29.128.1/28 dev eth2 Connections are pretty slow but they aren't reseted anymore. Hmm, I thought 172.29.128.1 was already a local address? What does ip addr

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-06-27 Thread Marco Berizzi
Herbert Xu wrote: However, the fact that the tcpdump causes more chunky packets to make it through could be an indication that there is a bug somewhere in our NAT/IPsec code or at least a suboptimal memory allocation strategy that's somehow avoided when AF_PACKET pins the skb down. JFYI:

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-06-27 Thread Herbert Xu
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 08:45:52AM +0200, Marco Berizzi wrote: Herbert Xu wrote: However, the fact that the tcpdump causes more chunky packets to make it through could be an indication that there is a bug somewhere in our NAT/IPsec code or at least a suboptimal memory allocation strategy

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-06-09 Thread Marco Berizzi
Marco Berizzi wrote: Marco Berizzi wrote: Herbert Xu wrote: However, the fact that the tcpdump causes more chunky packets to make it through could be an indication that there is a bug somewhere in our NAT/IPsec code or at least a suboptimal memory allocation strategy that's somehow avoided

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-05-18 Thread Marco Berizzi
Marco Berizzi wrote: Herbert Xu wrote: However, the fact that the tcpdump causes more chunky packets to make it through could be an indication that there is a bug somewhere in our NAT/IPsec code or at least a suboptimal memory allocation strategy that's somehow avoided when AF_PACKET pins the

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-05-08 Thread Marco Berizzi
Herbert Xu wrote: However, the fact that the tcpdump causes more chunky packets to make it through could be an indication that there is a bug somewhere in our NAT/IPsec code or at least a suboptimal memory allocation strategy that's somehow avoided when AF_PACKET pins the skb down. Ciao

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-26 Thread Herbert Xu
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 09:23:00AM +, Marco Berizzi wrote: What should I do? Mangling MSS with iptables --set-mss ? Altering MSS to 1440 did the trick. See: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdevm=114373067423528w=2 --clamp-mss-to-pmtu should be the best option. Cheers, -- Visit

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-26 Thread Marco Berizzi
Herbert Xu wrote: On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 09:23:00AM +, Marco Berizzi wrote: What should I do? Mangling MSS with iptables --set-mss ? Altering MSS to 1440 did the trick. See: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-netdevm=114373067423528w=2 --clamp-mss-to-pmtu should be the best

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-24 Thread Marco Berizzi
m I have forgotten to tell you that both mimosa pleiadi are running 2.6.16.9 driven by openswan 2.4.5 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-22 Thread Herbert Xu
Marco Berizzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there any news about this issue? Sorry for the delay, I've been travelling. The fact that tcpdump with host 172.16.0.138 does not fix it tells us that this is related to the NAT that you're doing to the 172.16 side of the network. Looking at your

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-10 Thread Marco Berizzi
Marco Berizzi wrote: Herbert Xu wrote: Marco Berizzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Running 'tcpdump -p -n -v ip net 10.16.24.117' on mimosa resolves the problem: sapgui clients can connect to sap servers while tcpdump is running on mimosa. Is this a bug? Very strange. Could you perhaps move

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-04 Thread Marco Berizzi
Herbert Xu wrote: Marco Berizzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Running 'tcpdump -p -n -v ip net 10.16.24.117' on mimosa resolves the problem: sapgui clients can connect to sap servers while tcpdump is running on mimosa. Is this a bug? Very strange. Could you perhaps move the tcpdump to another

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-03 Thread Marco Berizzi
Herbert Xu wrote: Marco Berizzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks a lot for the reply Herbert. Is there a way to tell netkey to frag packets like klips ignoring the DF bit? Thinking about this again, there is actually a bug in our various tunneling implementations when the user chooses to

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-03 Thread Marco Berizzi
John Heffner wrote: Marco Berizzi wrote: Herbert Xu wrote: Marco Berizzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I run 'ping 172.16.1.52 -M do -s 1472' from a 172.25.5.0 host I got this result: PING 172.16.1.52 (172.16.1.52) 1472(1500) bytes of data. 1480 bytes from 172.16.1.52: icmp_seq=1 ttl=62

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-03 Thread Marco Berizzi
Marco Berizzi wrote: Herbert Xu wrote: Marco Berizzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks a lot for the reply Herbert. Is there a way to tell netkey to frag packets like klips ignoring the DF bit? Thinking about this again, there is actually a bug in our various tunneling implementations

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-03 Thread Herbert Xu
Marco Berizzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Running 'tcpdump -p -n -v ip net 10.16.24.117' on mimosa resolves the problem: sapgui clients can connect to sap servers while tcpdump is running on mimosa. Is this a bug? Very strange. Could you perhaps move the tcpdump to another machine so that we

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-02 Thread John Heffner
Marco Berizzi wrote: Herbert Xu wrote: Marco Berizzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I run 'ping 172.16.1.52 -M do -s 1472' from a 172.25.5.0 host I got this result: PING 172.16.1.52 (172.16.1.52) 1472(1500) bytes of data. 1480 bytes from 172.16.1.52: icmp_seq=1 ttl=62 time=74.1 ms 1480

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-02 Thread Herbert Xu
Marco Berizzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks a lot for the reply Herbert. Is there a way to tell netkey to frag packets like klips ignoring the DF bit? Thinking about this again, there is actually a bug in our various tunneling implementations when the user chooses to disable PMTU

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-01 Thread Marco Berizzi
Herbert Xu wrote: Marco Berizzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I run 'ping 172.16.1.52 -M do -s 1472' from a 172.25.5.0 host I got this result: PING 172.16.1.52 (172.16.1.52) 1472(1500) bytes of data. 1480 bytes from 172.16.1.52: icmp_seq=1 ttl=62 time=74.1 ms 1480 bytes from 172.16.1.52:

Re: ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-04-01 Thread Herbert Xu
Marco Berizzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks a lot for the reply Herbert. Is there a way to tell netkey to frag packets like klips ignoring the DF bit? There is a netfilter module around which can zap the DF bit for you. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert

ipsec tunnel asymmetrical mtu

2006-03-31 Thread Marco Berizzi
I have done a little test to try to understand how ipsec and mtu play together. Here is my simple network schema: net 172.16.0.0--|2.6.16 box|--internet--|2.4-KLIPS|--net 172.25.5.0 +---ipsec tunnel--+ When I run 'ping 172.25.5.30 -M do -s 1472 -c 3' from a